 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 21 Aug 06 - 05:25 AM "This type of shit is the worst of trolling. Gets people concerned for no fucking reason. Piss off, please!" At least he said please Roger, it's nice to see good manners like that, it's so rare these days. Giok ¦¬] |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: catspaw49 Date: 21 Aug 06 - 01:16 AM Just lost the long post I wrote. Ratsafrazzle! My fault, wrong button. Anyway, Mxyzptlk and Btfsplk appeared in the mid'40's so they may just have been great ideas of two genius cartoonists. One was a villain from the fifth dimension who ripped Superman a new one until the Man of Steel could trick him into saying his name backwards. Joe was the ultimate jinx and the harbinger of all the bad luck there was to be had. Mr.Srbpjqakxw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Peace Date: 20 Aug 06 - 11:37 PM For YOU, Bill. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Bill D Date: 20 Aug 06 - 11:31 PM Mr. Mptzxtlplx...or something like that....(I think he was copied from "Joe Bzftzlpk" in Lil' Abner....who always had a rain cloud following him) (Now, *I* will accept applause) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: JennyO Date: 20 Aug 06 - 11:30 PM So the guest's name was njsqhu dijmewcs then? Wow! You might be onto something. Well it makes as much sense as anything else around here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Peace Date: 20 Aug 06 - 08:30 PM "Subject: ivtqgce xsvauheyc From: GUEST,scwemjid uhqsjn - PM Date: 20 Aug 06 - 08:25 PM pikesqr zqcga hqbkz izsfpv psmtonihv zgrmxie chqnbayx" I think I know what these posts are about. Does anyone recall in the old Superman comics that there was some sorta 'bad-news magical creature' that could only be sent back to its dimension by being tricked into saying its name backwards? (NO applause necessary--it's a gift, but thanks for the thought.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Peace Date: 20 Aug 06 - 08:09 PM "Subject: RE: BS: F*** it whats the point.. why bother ? From: Peace - PM Date: 12 Aug 06 - 11:57 PM This type of shit is the worst of trolling. Gets people concerned for no fucking reason. Piss off, please!" Roger. That post was deleted for whatever reasons the person saw fit. It was my response (I think the second post) to a troll who was saying he was depressed and implying that he was going to kill himself and shit like that. However, he'd started two or three threads (or written to two or three) and called everyone with an edit button some sort of bad person. I think that the whole thread got deleted. I don't doubt that there may be a clone who is trigger happy, and with regard to me I can name that person. However, piss on it. Life's too short. That person will croak before me, and that'll have to do. Please don't use me as the example for the things you are pursuing. If I get pissed about one of my posts getting the axe, I will inform Joe myself. No offense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Bill D Date: 20 Aug 06 - 07:59 PM Oh, sure...because you haven't yet. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 20 Aug 06 - 07:53 PM Subject: RE: BS: F*** it whats the point.. why bother ? From: Peace - PM Date: 12 Aug 06 - 11:57 PM This type of shit is the worst of trolling. Gets people concerned for no fucking reason. Piss off, please! The above post was deleted and then copied and pasted into this thread by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team (for strange reasons of his own). Anyone want to try and explain why the following post was NOT judged suitable for deletion?
-Joe Offer- Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why? From: Sorcha - PM Date: 06 Aug 06 - 08:05 PM ROGER! Shut the FUCK up and GO AWAY! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 20 Aug 06 - 06:25 AM I hope he calls him Ewan, after all that's what I call him. G. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Dave the Gnome Date: 20 Aug 06 - 06:11 AM He called your son what? :D (tG) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 20 Aug 06 - 05:59 AM You called my son? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Peace Date: 19 Aug 06 - 11:28 PM My gawd! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Bill D Date: 19 Aug 06 - 11:26 PM "idiosyncratic aberrations..." yeah, like 'public gesticulation'...(The children know MUCH worse!) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Peace Date: 19 Aug 06 - 10:57 PM As long as there isn't a hundred yards of them. I never did like that either. The mile was OK, but not the sprint. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: number 6 Date: 19 Aug 06 - 10:55 PM how about dashes Peace ------- would that make it easier ----------? sIx |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Sorcha Date: 19 Aug 06 - 10:50 PM Sorry Peace. .........etc. Oh give over and just GO Shambles. No, nobody here loves you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Big Mick Date: 19 Aug 06 - 10:30 PM Ahh, got my 'puter back. Just in time to remind this guy that the owner invited him to leave. Just go, Sham. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Peace Date: 19 Aug 06 - 08:48 PM "personal likes and dislikes.............." A personal dislike of mine is a string of periods at the end of what would have been a sentence had it had four periods. In this case, the ellipsis would be followed by the period or end punctuation point. Sorry to quibble so. Slow day. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 19 Aug 06 - 03:16 PM Who makes these rules, anyhow? -Joe- Well it would appear to be the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team who tells us what he will or will not allow others to post, what will or will not happen and what suggestions are accepted or not. Or it could just be my fellow poster Joe Offer just expressing and acting on his personal likes and dislikes.............. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 19 Aug 06 - 06:55 AM Shambles, your persecutory delusions are worsening. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 19 Aug 06 - 06:54 AM Hee hee!!! Nice to see the old paranoia is still ruling your mind Roger. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 19 Aug 06 - 06:47 AM Non sequitur alert: what does my birthday have to do with Mudcat editing? As it was one of your great supporters who first introduced the subject to this thread - why not ask him? Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John 'Giok' MacKenzie - PM Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:36 PM I would shoot that devil if I were you Joe, her can't count. Too many birthday drinks? Giok And then goes on to blame me. Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John 'Giok' MacKenzie - PM Date: 18 Aug 06 - 02:18 PM Just because it's irrelevant doesn't mean Roger won't drag it into his whinge. G. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 19 Aug 06 - 06:40 AM I think the worst thing I ever did to a birthday thread is grumble about it. Is that so horrible? Probably not - if you judge the role of a 'moderator' to inhibit posting. If you judge that the role of a 'moderator' simply to enable and encourage posting - it probably is. If the list of things that have been inhibited by this public 'grumbling' - only consisted of birthday threads it may not be too horrible. But the list is a long and continuing one. If you wish to be free to grumble - like any ordinary poster - please don't hesitate to become one of us again.......... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Peace Date: 18 Aug 06 - 11:22 PM "idiosyncratic aberrations..." Should this kind of language be posted where children might see it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Bill D Date: 18 Aug 06 - 06:46 PM Gee...Shambles better hope "Mild-mannered, but sometimes opinionated Joe Offer" doesn't get replaced by a "neutral" program set to delete repetitious nonsense and non-sequiturs. Joe at least TRIES to make allowances for idiosyncratic aberrations... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Wesley S Date: 18 Aug 06 - 05:13 PM Joe - do your likes and dislikes remain the same when you change from "Joe Offer" { mild mannered moderator for a great international website } and when you turn into the "Current Chief of the Mudcat editing team" ? And does the change require a cape? Because your secret identity has been blown. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Joe Offer Date: 18 Aug 06 - 04:59 PM I think that it means that supposedly, I am not allowed to have likes and dislikes. If I like something or dislike something, then I suppose the logic is that I will act according to my likes and dislikes. I think the worst thing I ever did to a birthday thread is grumble about it. Is that so horrible? Who makes these rules, anyhow? -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: MMario Date: 18 Aug 06 - 02:27 PM well - Joe - you have publicly stated your dis-like of multitudinous b-day threads. I think that was as "Joe Offer, fellow poster"; though I seem to recall that it was also stated as that other role you fill. But b-day threads continue. Whereas, god forbid, should conditions change and anything you have said as "Current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team' no longer be valid - or an exception be made... well - obviously....err I dunno. What does it have to do with mudcat editing? Is this a trick question? Is it the difference between "if you have anything to say you may start new threads" and "if you have anything new to say you may start new threads". Is it about the difference between crossing the road and cross a grape? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: catspaw49 Date: 18 Aug 06 - 02:24 PM Actually Giok, if you could die of assholism, Shambotinkles would have croaked long ago. If sheer idiocy caused a rash, he'd be scratching himself silly all over his body instead of just his nuts as he normally does. And if hypocrisy and lies were sugar and pies he'd weigh in at about a ton. Three months ago Max asked you to leave here Shammypammy. Plain English....No bull, very direct. You talk of other's honor Shambotubbly? You have none, nada, zilch, morally bankrupt. Up yours and have a nice day........I just did!!!!!!!) Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 18 Aug 06 - 02:18 PM Just because it's irrelevant doesn't mean Roger won't drag it into his whinge. G. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Joe Offer Date: 18 Aug 06 - 02:17 PM Non sequitur alert: what does my birthday have to do with Mudcat editing? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 18 Aug 06 - 02:02 PM If only self righteousness and smugness were a terminal condition. At least then we could see an end to Roger's wittering. Giok |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:53 PM Joe Offer Vs Birth Day Threads The fact that you do may account for the aggrievement you feel. Not sure that I do need a role model but if I did - it would not the example of acceptable posting behaviour currently set for our forum to follow - of do as I say - not as I do. I think that the setting, justifying and defending of such an example may now account for quite a lot of aggrievement on our forum. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:36 PM I would shoot that devil if I were you Joe, her can't count. Too many birthday drinks? Giok |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Joe Offer Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:35 PM 200 The devil made me do it.
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: MMario Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:27 PM Do you still claim that you do not wish to tell max how to run his site? Because you do so frequently. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:23 PM 200 wasted posts |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Ebbie Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:22 PM One difference between you and me, the Sham, is that I don't consider that I need a role model. The fact that you do may account for the aggrievement you feel. I consider myself responsible for myself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Clinton Hammond Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:19 PM " In my book" Your book doesn't matter squirt on Mudcat...... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 18 Aug 06 - 01:07 PM What stupid point do you think you're making by referring to him third person neutral. A simple one that is often overlooked. That the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is only a role that is currently occupied by the fellow poster called Joe Offer. That when for example Joe Offer states in post that he does not like Birthday threads - (or any of the number of things that are not to his personal taste) - that this is only a personal view and just as valid as any other poster's personal view. And no more so. But when in his role as current chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - he give an assurance to our forum in an editing comment - that he does not honour - the excuse provided for this - is not just a personal view but an official one which brings into question his suitability to continue in this role. And perhaps question the need for such a role to continue at all? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: MMario Date: 18 Aug 06 - 12:57 PM ?????? The Shambles says:"You do not seem to have noticed that in fact I have long-ago ceased to officially complain" When did this occur? seems to be a few complaints in your current post, which makes that statement inaccurate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 18 Aug 06 - 12:49 PM I've done my best to be honest, but Shambles calls me a liar. So, I guess I have nothing more to say. -Joe Offer- Well, despite this assurance - you did go on to say more. But perhaps this was only to be expected. In my book - someone judged to be a liar includes one who does see any reason why they should honour their public assurances. The facts have demonstrated that you feel you can ignore any assurance given to our forum in an editing comment here by simply changing your mind. You must accept the consequences of that action and not make the usual attempt to minimise, justify and defend these actions and make this attempt under the usual double standard of behaviour. An attempt which discredits all of the honest efforts made here and makes The Mudcat Cafe look hypocritical. Despite your groundless accusations over my reactions to your conduct, you have been shown to be a man whose word cannot be trusted. And yet you still expect posters to trust your word when you clearly do not trust anyone else's. And you consider it unfair if you are judged when you feel qualified to impose your judgement on others and do not consider this to be at all unfair. You feel that you can constantly give posters cause for complaint but then have some right to insult them if they should do this. You do not seem to have noticed that in fact I have long-ago ceased to officially complain. As it is clear there is little point in such a course. I attempt to try and post my views to inform our forum of the true nature and current level of censorship - to enable this to be discussed. And I will continue to make this attempt - despite the efforts of the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to prevent and restrict this. And yes I do expect those who would feel themselves qualified to impose their judgement on me to set a better example than the example set by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and will work towards ensuring that a better example will be shown in future. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Clinton Hammond Date: 17 Aug 06 - 01:10 PM You're still setting a bad example... It still isn't working.... So why continue? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 17 Aug 06 - 01:06 PM You may have missed the following editing comment as it was inserted into a spam post that was itself inserted and which now forms the first post in this thread. Sample of a typical deleted message, moved here for demonstration purposes. I moved all of the messages from August 10-12 into this thread, so people can see just what we've been deleting. -Joe Offer- Perhaps for a little bit of balance - a few examples of the sort of posts that 'we' have not been deleting? And the sort of personal judgements posts which some may consider that are actually being encouraged............ Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why? From: Sorcha - PM Date: 06 Aug 06 - 08:05 PM ROGER! Shut the FUCK up and GO AWAY! Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: katlaughing - PM Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:15 PM PLEASE CLOSE THIS USELESS THREAD! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Clinton Hammond Date: 17 Aug 06 - 12:41 PM Too afraid to answer Shambles? If setting a bad example isn't working, why do you continue to do it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 17 Aug 06 - 12:39 PM You may have missed the following editing comment (in bold) as in was inserted into an existing post and did not refresh this thread. The imposed censorship action referred to occured after the period selected by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to show all of his 'silent deletions' in this thread. You may judge this thread to have been 'bathwater' and have deserved such censorship to be imposed, in your name and in order to avoid 'trouble'. Then again you may not? But without the poster bringing this censorship to the attention of this thread - you would have never been able to make this judgement for yourself - as it has already been made for you. That's right - we generally don't allow threads that are directed at individual Mudcatters, so I deleted that thread as soon as I saw it. That one was sure to become a personal attack by the fourth message. Here's the introductory message: Subject: BS: Has Shambles Been Evicted? From: GUEST Date: 16 Aug 06 - 02:11 PM I hear a strange quietness across the Mudcat land. Can it be that Mr. Shambles has rambled on to bigger and better places? I hope that he finds a cause worthy of his persistence. Seems to me that a thread like that is sure to cause trouble. -Joe Offer- Strange then that a thread titled Shambles still here and why? was not so judged and only suffered an imposed title change - before finally being subject to imposed closure by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team. But then he will do as he likes and justfy it later as being 'Mudcat' policy - even when it may be the very opposite of what he judged to be 'Mudcat policy' last week. The following examples of acceptable posting - from the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team are not judged (by him) to be 'trouble' or to be personally motivated. Dunno, Roger. As I see it, I sometimes disagree with people, but I'm not combative. It's the combative stuff that causes trouble at Mudcat. and I do believe that needs to be controlled. Joe Offer Shambles, go whine somewhere else, or maybe we should start threads about you and the sheep or something. Joe Offer ----- But Shambles believes in this sort of thing, so I think that maybe this would be a good opportunity to smear his reputation. Shambles, I'm sick of you and your shit Joe Offer. ------ Ah, Shambles - we make an exception for you, since you seem to think it's a good thing to have personal attacks. We want to keep you happy, after all. Your whining is so annoying. Joe Offer ------ Yes, I think you may well be first on the list, my friend. It's time for you either to shut up, or to use a name and take responsibility for what you have to say. If you continue to refuse to use a name, you will be come a non-person around here, and every single message you post will be deleted. Free speech is fine, but you're just a pain in the ass. -Joe Offer- If such posting behaviour is judged as needing to be controlled (by the one posting it) - perhaps as start could be made by a change to a new Chief of the Mudcat Editing team who would be prepared to set a better example? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Clinton Hammond Date: 17 Aug 06 - 12:11 PM Too afraid to answer Shambles? If setting a bad example isn't working, why do you continue to do it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: MMario Date: 17 Aug 06 - 12:08 PM Shambles says: I am in no position to express an informed opinion on the true nature and current level of all the forms of imposed censorship on our forum. that has been evident for some time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 17 Aug 06 - 11:58 AM Shambles, for years you have been making empty and untruthful allegations about Mudcat editors basing message deletion on favoritism and personal likes and dislikes. No......... I have povided evidence - mostly in the words used by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, (some of) his known and anonymous volunteers to justifiy their imposed actions. Perhaps our forum will judge who is is that has been making personally motivated allegations and assumptions - as yet more of these are being made by you in this thread to gain more support for your witch-hunt and for the special posting restrictions taht apply only to me....... I thought it was time to give some solid evidence, so people can see the typical messages we delete - and so they can understand why there should be no need for explanation or notation of these deletions. Your decision to litter this thread with spam has served no other purpose than to demonstrate that you will simply choose to as you wish and that the whole fabric of our forum will not crumble if posts such as these, were simply left alone. I present these messages as evidence. Surely, my evidence has as much a place in this thread as unsubstantiated allegations from Shambles. There is no baby being thrown out with the bathwater, although Shambles has done his best to mislead people into suspecting that there may be something devious about our editing practices. Our forum does not need any evidence provided to demonstrate what spam is. And as Jon has already pointed out - there is no evidence provided here to demonstrate your claim to our forum - that nothing is being thrown-out with this bathwater. These are the messages that would usually be deleted in a typical three-day period at Mudcat. I think I found all of them. Shambles, if you wish to allege that there were other messages deleted during this period, prove it. I think you've slandered the Mudcat volunteers long enough. Like any other ordinary poster- I am in no position to express an informed opinion on the true nature and current level of all the forms of imposed censorship on our forum. I do know what it is for my posts and that is why the request is being made that all such impostions are recorded with the editing comments that litter my posts and for all posters to be seen to be treated equally. Then all posters will be seen to be protected from any personally motivated and selective imposition (and from posts containing 'empty and untruthful allegations' like this one from the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team). And if their services are still required - all known and anonymous 'Mudcat volunteers' will be protected from any allegations that any of their imposed actions were personally biased. |
